[blml] EBL 2004 appeal number 10

[Alain Gottcheiner]

At 13:03 20/09/2006 -0400, you wrote:



 >A, There's nothing more to say about my hand, no additional strength or
 >special distribution which i could show using our system
 >
 >B, I'd like to play the last bidden contract
> >
> >P1, They should alert none of the two situations. Opponents know there
> >are two possibilities, so if important they can enquier for that.
> >
> >P2, A is the usual method, so alert if B.
> >
> >P3, B is the logical method so alert if A.
> >
> >P4, The most of the players (including experts) have no agreement to
> >this situation, so the pass can be the both type of hand. If EW has an
> >agreement --- does not matter A or B --- they should alert.
> >

I think P3 is intenable, as is every prescript of alerting "type A" passes, 
as every player, in every system, has "difficult hands" that can't be bid 
in such-and-such situation. Therefore, 90% of passes are "type A complete", 
i.e. "I have nothing to tell, or I have something to tell that my system 
doesn't allow".

For example :
1D      1S      p       ?
Most pairs are unable to show a long diamond suit. Should we alert because 
advancer might have a fair hand with long diamonds ?

If this is common bridge knowledge, what about that :
1D      2Swk    3C      ?
Robson and his followers (including Yours Truly) will tell you 3H is now 
fit-showing.
Should you alert the pass because partenr could have hearts ?
(of course, if he bids hearts belatedly, one should alert and explain this 
is the only way partner had to do so, lest opponents draw inferences from 
the original pass)

Or, the ability to bid a 2335 stopperless 8-count after 1D (1H) depends on 
the meaning of your doubles and 1S bids. But I wouldn't compel opponents to 
alert the pass because they happen to play "double = 4 spades" and "1S = 5 
spades".

Best regards,

    Alain.